Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:21306 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3174 of 2025 Applicant :- Babu @ Naushad Sain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 202 of 2024 under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich. As per contents of FIR, fabricated sale deed is said to have been executed on 6th May, 2022 with regard to plot in question by impersonating the informant. The applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and has been subsequently nominated on the basis of statement of accused Kundan Lal. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him which is evident from the fact that he is not nominated in the F.I.R. and even otherwise there is no allegation against him of having fabricated any document. It is submitted that applicant has been introduced in the statement of Kundan Lal who is nominated in the F.I.R. but even as per statement, applicant's involvement is only shown as one of the persons who accompanied the main accused for the purposes of identification of the plot. It is submitted that the applicant is not beneficiary of the transaction and co-accused Ban Devi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court in Criminal Misc.Bail application No. 2581 of 2025. It is submitted that applicant does not have any criminal history. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with submission that statement of co-accused Kundan Lal clearly indicates the fact that some of the amount of sale transaction pertaining to transaction was accepted by the applicant as well. It is however admitted that applicant is neither the vendor nor vendee of the transaction and there is no previous criminal history. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that applicant has not been named in the F.I.R. and has been introduced only on the basis of alleged confessional statement of Kundan Lal who is nominated in the F.I.R. He is under incarceration since 25th December, 2024 without any previous criminal history and the aspect of his being a beneficiary of the transaction would be subject matter of evidence during course of trial. Co-accused Ban Devi has also been released on bail as indicated herein above. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution." Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly bail application is allowed. Let applicant Babu @ Naushad Sain involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 prabhat Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench